Hawke's Bay Herald. THURSDAY, MAY 19, 1898. KRUGER AND KOIZE.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XXXIII, Issue 10919, 19 May 1898, Page 2

Hawke's Bay Herald. THURSDAY, MAY 19, 1898. KRUGER AND KOIZE.

A cable meacago In yesterday's iteuo represented President Ktnger as soylag that If Mt Kou% late Chief Jaitlor, Is oomcti In bb Interpretation of the Convention batweeo the Transvaal end Grent Biitala It would perhnps Involve drawing the sword against Great Britain We ore somewhat at a lcaa to understand this message. The dispute between Krnger and Chief Jnstloe Koza did not, 85 far as we oan see, involve the question of eczarnln tights. The correapoudecDO between the two Is pablitbed In The Times at April 18th, and Mr Kolzs makes out on unanswerable oase. Oae Brown, an Englishman, applied for certain mining leases utder an Act oalled the Gold Liw. Just prior to this application, and it la said in view of it, Eruger limed a Gazette notloe deslgued to prevent tho itBUQ of the leases, and got the Voikaraad, by resolution, to coniiim tho proclamation. Brown appealed to the Supreme Court, on the ground that a aw oannot be eet adde by proolamatiOD, fven when ost. firmed by a retolutiou oi Parliament. This view was upheld by j the Courts. It was laid down that by ! the Grondwot, or Constitution of the i Transvaal, an existing law oould 1 only be repealed by the passage In due farm of another law, that the Supreme Oourb should be the interpreter of the law, and that the Judges aloo hold office for life unless removed by Parliament for mliconduot. The President relied on a olanse in an Aob passed in 1890, wbloh read that " The leaal foioa of a law or resolution, published by the State President in the Gazette, may not be disputed, saving the right of the people to petition with retpeot thereto." The Court held that If this law meant whit the President contended It did, and gave him power by the publication of a proclamation in the Gazette to alter or suspend an Aofc of Parliament, 16 wb ultra viret, as it ooiilioted with tho Constitution, and would make (he President superior to Parliament and the law of the land. "While the suit of Brown was still in progress the President senj for the Chief Jnßlioe and wished him to promise that he would regard (he reiolu° | tion of the Valksraad as law. The Chief ; Jostioa pointed out that the proper way to amend the law was by patilng an , amending Act, and that that could easily be done as the Valktraad wan in seislon, Bat tor some reaion. or other Kipg« '

would not adopt that oonne, and the Id terview ended by blm threatening to suspend the Chief Justice if be would not promiie to give a deolslon advene to Brown. The five Judges of the Trans ■ vaal on appeal unanimously upheld the Chief Jnstloe's decision, and prononnoed the law of 1890 to be unconstitutional. The dispute wased hot, and the Chief Justice of Cape Colony was called la qb mediator, Oa bis flUjgoetlon the Jadgti agreed to suspend their tight of tostlog the validity of Acts oc resolutions of the Volksraad provided the Pietldent took immediate «teps to get the Constitution amended in dne form, which looladed a vote of the eleotors. Thlß Kiuger ptomited, bat took no uteps to carry out that promise. The Chief Jastioe wrote to him, and received a reply to the tfFiOt that the understanding arilved at wa« binding on the Jadgea, bat not oa the Prcddent. Againßt tbla outrageous prop tltlon Koiza protested vigorously, aud as t'ao xetalt was dlamlsoed. Tbo Chief Jnstlco pointed crib that his dismissal was nnconstitational, bat the only answer be got was that the P/ebldmt abided by what he had done. Mr Ko'zj concluded the correspondence by dcolaiicg that) be was Chief Justice for life despite the Pteeldent's Bcilan. So the matter stood when the last mall lels. Ib would appear, howtvor, fiom the Oible massoßa in yesterday's issue that Mr Koiza must still be aotißg in a judicial oapoolty, despite the President, for the latter is repotted es sajlng that If Mr Ko Z3 was corrcot in bis Interpretation of the Convention between Great Britain and the Transvaal, it would involve the te-openini? of tho boundary question, and perhaps drawing tbo sword ogaiuet the British. Apparently tbla is another matter altogether, Invoking a question of boundary. We have not the fall text of j the Convention by ns, but as modified in 1884 ID left Great Britain control of the foreign relations of the Transvaal with the exception of the Orange Free State, and also provided that the boundaries of the Transvaal oould not be extended without iho content of Great Britain. Io hae been known for oodiq time that the Boere desired an extension of boundaries, Luu unleia the pmohase from Portugal ol a portion of Mczimb'.qae li contemplated that It impossible without trenching on British territory or the O.ango Free State. Probably it will be found that negotlo. tlooß have been entered into with Portugal, with the ultimate view of get. ing poesßssion of Ddtagoa Biy, and io teoarlog a sea frontage. If so, there is not the slightest doubt Gtest Britain would object, and Mr Koiz-j dsb cvldsotly ex- ; prested the oplnloa that In this objection ebe would be wlibin tho teims of the Canvention of 1881.